What kind of damage model is being planned for rF2. Crumble zones, mechanical damage from physical contact, visible or merely affecting the handling/performance? I know the paint scratches was mentioned, and that it would be incoming in near future build. I saw this beamng/torque3d work and it looks pretty damn cool. I know that this is not something that sims are going after any time soon, but still it looks awesome. http://racesimcentral.com/2013/01/beamng-and-torque3d-update/
is that a Crysis game? Been watching them videos for a while. The crash tests are hilarious. If it ever comes out, I will buy it just to crash around. Them tires on the truck look slippery. it just slides from one lane to the next.
As cool as this would be I'm sure it's a time management thing. Just guessing here but ISI would have to put alot of resources into something that isnt' a "must have" for most serious sim racers.
Damage model looks perfect and that's something I've always missed. It's the reason I got into FlatOut too because there the cars would fall apart piece by piece. I just hope future would be now and sims of today would also have that kind of damage model... Car physics on the other hand are a way off in the video. I see it's summery tarmac road but why is the truck handling like it's on ice?
I can just imagine modders looking at that video and saying to themselves, "**** off!" Not only do you have to worry about getting the models looking right, as well as the usuals of textures and performance physics, but also define how and where each body part attaches... and how easily it bends... and in which direction(s)... yeeeeesh! But hey, great for the rest of us when we get that sort of thing
If i had talent and was technically possible, i 'd work for modders team only doing this. Maybe this will possible become an solution for modelling tires in rf2, wich people are saying is to complex. I think. I'm just guessing. Have no idea how mod teams works.
BeamNG and Rigs of Rods system works by making each edge in a model (a vertex to vertex connection) a suspension system (spring and damper). Practically they make the whole model a "soft body" with permanent bend capabilities. Imagine a 10000 poly car with each edge assigned to act as this.. IN REAL TIME! Now just imagine having 30 of these cars on track xD Not to say 10000 polys is not really up to today standards.. The beamNG/RoR system is more a technology showcase system then something that you could use everyday in any game =) I also guess it is very unstable if you try to reduce computation iterations. I have a feeling the videos they posted are actually not real time but frame by frame rendered (I know that cryengine has that ability) rf2 uses a similar soft body system on the tires, although it is very different cause it's not dependant on the visual model but the underlying tire computations and then the visual model just follows those computations. rf1 damage system actuates at contact with collideable object (not real time), receives the impulse and computes if parts should break off and how much the vertices should move according to the parameters in the damage file Racing simulation's priority is the PRECISION and SPEED of the physics computations. The soft body car physics in my opinion IS the future, but we'll have to wait a few more years for it to become practical in simulations. EDIT: If you ask me, I'd be extremely happy with a system in rf2 seen in Race Driver: Grid. It is a sort of blend between the two. Metal bending on impact (depends which metal, skin or the chasis construction), and many special objects such as hinged doors, breakable windscreen/headlights, springy bumpers when damaged.. Also tethered tires on open wheel cars with rope physics would be awesome xD I am a modder, and I'd love to assign these properties to objects, it wouldn't make me go "oh **** off" =)
Forget the brilliant collision and destruction in rF2. It will not. Look at how many resources eats physics and graphics. And in real time rF1-2 did not think it deals only empirically detailed table of data. I am familiar with RoR, is simply spectacular collision in slow motion for a beautiful video in real time of the collision will not notice. In my opinion, the lack of fear rF2 damage the machine. No sense of respect for the car because it made of wood.
Sims are about racing, not crashing. Priorities.... I will definitely play the game in the OP, though.
Is the damage a visual or handling/performace affecting kind, its part of the realism, and I like that. Biggest pet peeve I have is, that when vehicles in sims during contact or full on crashes seem like they dont have nearly enough mass and after contact move like feathers in the wind. It not only looks stupid, but also takes away the feel of the contact, and there fore decrease the feeling of realism.
Another consideration is licensing. Many games have been hamstrung because a manufacturer would not approve licensing if their car could get trashed in the game.
As others said we're not gonna see anything like that in our sims for a very long time. The resources needed from devs + hw requirements for players + license problems imo equals a big no for at least another decade or 2. It does look fantastic, hope I'll be able to try that game myself
and yet they have to pass strict insurance guidelines that force them into wrecking a real life version of said car. And then they post it in their commercial to show how safe the car is. And you can watch it over and over on youtube. Watching some of this makes me think I don't want to drive a real car if it can damage like that!
Damage and collision model are different things... Some race drivers say that they partly enjoy the racing because the thrills what the danger in racing gives them. Maybe prober damage model would help us have some of that feeling ( of course it can not be the exactly the same feeling )
Damage is VERY important - if there are no consequences for making mistakes, you will drive differently. Just look at the differences between BTCC and F1 where consequences of contact are mostly completely different... It may effect your speed but more importantly it will effect your attitude and behaviour to racing. At Spa in an F1 car for instance, you won't be trying to rub tyres through Burnenville if you damage model is non-existant... Given the limitations in the gmotor engine, I think GSC has done well with making realistic collisions/damage. Again, it's probably a case of understanding what each component does and what numbers are 'real'. In our league we have taken GSC numbers and tweaked to suit and I think we have very realistic looking crashes (given the gmotor limitations sure). So maybe it's the same case with rF2? From what I've seen thus far, the collision/damage is pretty average (especially in some mods, WSR jumps out). I'm not quite sure how it all works, but I'd have thought if the physics were correct when the car is driving under normal circumstances that the same physics would apply when it's not. But once the car starts hitting things and rolling it is anything but realistic, the car looks like it weighs 50kg and the points of rotation look completely wrong (as though it rotates about a fixed point which is not even on the car). That says to me that there might be something fundamentally wrong with the physics of the car. Like I said I'm not expert at the inner workings and unless someone can explain it to me, I'll hold the belief that if the way the car reacts unrealistically from hitting walls and rolling then the physics aren't implemented correctly.
